You have 100 people complaining loudly about "innovation". arguing over the definition of "next-gen" and the definition of "mmorpg". You have thousands of people who don't visit the forums but are willing to pay money to play the games they like.
There's a descrepancy between the people loudly complaining and what the overall market wants. There is a market for the "innovative" games you described, it's just not as big as the market for games that offer progressive changes versus disruptive changes.
What progressive changes? The amount of progress that's been made in the last 6 years is... sadly, almost non existant. Compare that to the major leaps in progress from 1997-2003... and you can see why most people think the MMO market should just hurry up and die.
Let blizz/Bio/Anet make something really innovative(hopefully Titan) and sure it will sucess because of its quality. Every company that are trying something innovative are not providing high quality game and its failing. i tried Earthrise and mortal online the concept is great but its terrible quality, sorry fans! its feels very unfinished product.
Blizzard? Innovative? Why would they start doing that now? Everything they do is copied. Their most successful IPs are just copied shamelessly from Warhammer. WoW has no unique features to speak of, its just a frankenstein of outdated gameplay mechanics with a billion dollar ad campaign behind it. And the last game they released was just a graphics upgrade of a game they already made years ago.
Bioware? No, Bioware has been remaking the same RPG since Baldur's Gate 2. Same mechanics, same basic storyline.
Anet? Maybe, there's hope.
Warcraft is more successful than Warhammer. I have played the warhammer games and all I can say they can't even hold a candle to Warcraft.
newsflash, warhammer is more than videogames.
And on that note, Warhammer>hippycraft.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling" Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
Let blizz/Bio/Anet make something really innovative(hopefully Titan) and sure it will sucess because of its quality. Every company that are trying something innovative are not providing high quality game and its failing. i tried Earthrise and mortal online the concept is great but its terrible quality, sorry fans! its feels very unfinished product.
Blizzard? Innovative? Why would they start doing that now? Everything they do is copied. Their most successful IPs are just copied shamelessly from Warhammer. WoW has no unique features to speak of, its just a frankenstein of outdated gameplay mechanics with a billion dollar ad campaign behind it. And the last game they released was just a graphics upgrade of a game they already made years ago.
Bioware? No, Bioware has been remaking the same RPG since Baldur's Gate 2. Same mechanics, same basic storyline.
Anet? Maybe, there's hope.
You are wrong. WoW did bring a few new things to the genre - quest driven gameplay SWG also had quest driven gameplay, if you're saying... WoW made it so that the only way to level up was questing, yes I suppose they did, but that is neither innovative or a good thing, There were quests yes but they were not the way to go levelling up all the way to max level. WoW had so many quests and they were not the noticeboard ones which most MMOs before it had.
casual friendly soloing experience many games had casual friendly solo experiences, Not all the way to max level for any class. Not in the way WoW had it.
instanced dungeons were around long long before WoW, Really? Cause most MMOs I've seen used to have these public dungeons. Even EQ2 which came only 1 month before WoW had them. Can I have examples?
their LFG tool is quite unique and maybe a few other things if you mean the dungeon finder, then yes that is fairly unique, though it had been done by several FTP MMOs before, and again, it's not really a good thing. No LFG had this whole teleport to dungeon and automatically put together a group thing going on.
Warcraft is more successful than Warhammer. I have played the warhammer games and all I can say they can't even hold a candle to Warcraft That doesn't change the fact that Warcraft is a direct copy of it. You come across as a fanboy here. Do some research on how Warcraft came to be, then come back. Warhammer is an ooold IP. I love Warcraft yes. I don't hide it. I know Warcraft was inspired by Warhammer. Don't see how this diminishes Blizzard's efforts. They might have been inspired by Warhammer but they took their universe in a very different and unique direction especially with the whole humourous and goofy atmosphere they have.
I guess you're talking about SC2. This comment shows you have no appreciation for what Starcraft is. It's one of the most amazing games out there. But it's fairly hardcore Actually, it's one of the simplest RTS games out there, and I'm very familiar with it. It also did very little new or innovative in its day. SC is competetive, not hardcore. I can be competetive about Pokemon Stadium 2 mini games, and write up a thousand different strats for them, but that doesn't make it hardcore . Hardcore is something which is difficult. Starcraft is ridiculously hard to master and yes it is very competitive. The fact that it is fairly easy to pick up doesn't make it simple. But I am always open to hear about other RTS which have much more depth.
Mass effect is nothing like Baldur's gate and neither was Dragon Age Origins Dragon Age, game mechanic wise, yes almost identical to it. Mass Effect was the first time Bioware has veered ever so slightly away from the Neverwinter style gameplay. . If you mean that in DAO they had a party in fantasy setting doing quests etc... yes it is what most RPGs are like. Mass effect is extremely different from all other RPGS but I like how you down play this by saying that they 'veered ever so SLIGHTLY away from NWN gameplay'.
Just for the record, I never said if something is good/bad. I only pointed out they are different. Of course, I am biased but so are you. If I was wrong somewhere, I am happy to hear about specific examples of games which did z and x. Of course, I haven't played all the RTS,RPGs, MMOs out there. But neither have you. so you can never be certain about some of your arguments and neither can I.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
I don't know what else has been said, but your answer is this: New is hard. Innovating means building something from scratch and that means it could be systematically broken. The reason there are so many copy cats (in MMO's as well as other genres) is that it's so much easier to polish someone else's gameplay. It's safe, and it's how we get our polished yet un-innovative titles like Call of Duty.
Because they vast majority of the mmo playing consumer base is made up of non-forum dwelling, non-hardcore gamers (at least historically speaking) who haven't followed the genres development since it's inception perhaps?
If 70%+ of those currently playing across all mmo's happened to be old Merid/UO/MUD vet's with a vested interest in all things gaming and a high forum troll factor then yes, it would point to the fact that these gamers who constantly talk about innovation, don't really want it.
But that's not the reality of the situation. Those who talk about innovation do want it, the vast majority of actual consumers though, don't.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Look at Ryzom, The Chronicles of Spellborn or Vanguard. They all had features and mechanics that were different from the current themepark model. Then why did they fail?
No one is asking for a game that is "different". They are always asking for a game that is fun, adn struggling to describe what would be fun.
Those games failed because they were not fun.
different =/= fun.
Features don't work in a vacuum. They work in combination with each other. you can't satisfy players that want a PvP game, by just flipping a switch and making the game PvP.
Unless all the other features work well with PvP, it won't be fun.
Let blizz/Bio/Anet make something really innovative(hopefully Titan) and sure it will sucess because of its quality. Every company that are trying something innovative are not providing high quality game and its failing. i tried Earthrise and mortal online the concept is great but its terrible quality, sorry fans! its feels very unfinished product.
Blizzard? Innovative? Why would they start doing that now? Everything they do is copied. Their most successful IPs are just copied shamelessly from Warhammer. WoW has no unique features to speak of, its just a frankenstein of outdated gameplay mechanics with a billion dollar ad campaign behind it. And the last game they released was just a graphics upgrade of a game they already made years ago.
Bioware? No, Bioware has been remaking the same RPG since Baldur's Gate 2. Same mechanics, same basic storyline.
Anet? Maybe, there's hope.
You are wrong. WoW did bring a few new things to the genre - quest driven gameplay SWG also had quest driven gameplay, if you're saying... WoW made it so that the only way to level up was questing, yes I suppose they did, but that is neither innovative or a good thing, There were quests yes but they were not the way to go levelling up all the way to max level. WoW had so many quests and they were not the noticeboard ones which most MMOs before it had.
casual friendly soloing experience many games had casual friendly solo experiences, Not all the way to max level for any class. Not in the way WoW had it. Dark Age of Camelot did, Asheron's Call did, Ultima Online did.
instanced dungeons were around long long before WoW, Really? Cause most MMOs I've seen used to have these public dungeons. Even EQ2 which came only 1 month before WoW had them. Can I have examples? Dark Age of Camelot, Anarchy Online, EverQuest 1, Star Wars Galaxies.
their LFG tool is quite unique and maybe a few other things if you mean the dungeon finder, then yes that is fairly unique, though it had been done by several FTP MMOs before, and again, it's not really a good thing. No LFG had this whole teleport to dungeon and automatically put together a group thing going on. Except those FTP MMOs. And again, it's a bad thing.
Warcraft is more successful than Warhammer. I have played the warhammer games and all I can say they can't even hold a candle to Warcraft That doesn't change the fact that Warcraft is a direct copy of it. You come across as a fanboy here. Do some research on how Warcraft came to be, then come back. Warhammer is an ooold IP. I love Warcraft yes. I don't hide it. I know Warcraft was inspired by Warhammer. Don't see how this diminishes Blizzard's efforts. They might have been inspired by Warhammer but they took their universe in a very different and unique direction especially with the whole humourous and goofy atmosphere they have There's a difference between inspiration, and copying. Blizzard was making a Warhammer game, but lost the license to it, so they just renamed the characters, bam, Warcraft was born. .
I guess you're talking about SC2. This comment shows you have no appreciation for what Starcraft is. It's one of the most amazing games out there. But it's fairly hardcore Actually, it's one of the simplest RTS games out there, and I'm very familiar with it. It also did very little new or innovative in its day. SC is competetive, not hardcore. I can be competetive about Pokemon Stadium 2 mini games, and write up a thousand different strats for them, but that doesn't make it hardcore . Hardcore is something which is difficult. Starcraft is ridiculously hard to master and yes it is very competitive. The fact that it is fairly easy to pick up doesn't make it simple. But I am always open to hear about other RTS which have much more depth. Age of Empires. Total Annihilation.
Mass effect is nothing like Baldur's gate and neither was Dragon Age Origins Dragon Age, game mechanic wise, yes almost identical to it. Mass Effect was the first time Bioware has veered ever so slightly away from the Neverwinter style gameplay. . If you mean that in DAO they had a party in fantasy setting doing quests etc... yes it is what most RPGs are like. Mass effect is extremely different from all other RPGS but I like how you down play this by saying that they 'veered ever so SLIGHTLY away from NWN gameplay'.
Just for the record, I never said if something is good/bad. I only pointed out they are different. Of course, I am biased but so are you. If I was wrong somewhere, I am happy to hear about specific examples of games which did z and x. Of course, I haven't played all the RTS,RPGs, MMOs out there. But neither have you. so you can never be certain about some of your arguments. Well, are are very civil, I apologize if I came across with hostlity .
Problem is that 'innovation' to most MMO developers means to add an interesting catch to the game, not revamp teh ideal. Adding one special thing (eg. ability to fly) doesn't mean the game is innovative, in fact it means it just did something other games just couldnt be bothered with.
Innovation is to take the current ideas and move them in a way other games wouldn't dare. A perfect example is to have more than two player alliances... like 3 or even 4 way PvP, that is innovation, to do something that other games are too afraid of doing due forseen hurdles.
And if all the data is gathered and the in-game behavior, purchasing patterns and everything else show that players just want their favorite game but with a different skin, then it doesn't make sense for the devs to say"This is obviously wrong. They want something different! Team, go make different!"
The "they're the people making the games, if they're good developers they should already know what I want!" argument is a common one and it falls apart completely when you actually try to back that up with data supporting any one unified voice for a particular type of game change or design suggestion.
There you made my point for me. If they don't know what players want, they are not good developers.
Aion was more of the same with a gimmick and a different skin. It did reasonably well. We've yet to see how Rift works with its gimmick and different skin. One thing I'm confident about is that people will want something different eventually.
One thing is for sure; customer is not always right. More often than not he/she is wrong. Also, the loud pro-sandbox minority here at MMORPG.com shows that those who give feedback don't necessarily represent the whole player base. (Or maybe it is a vocal majority here but they still are a minority in the grand scheme of things.)
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
My long Answer is: Because it takes tens of millions of dollars to make a AAA MMO these days, and investors don't want to risk that kind of cash on new. They only invest in tried methods. Business NEVER risks money on new, they always leech 'innovation' from small business, universities, and independent inventors.
Let blizz/Bio/Anet make something really innovative(hopefully Titan) and sure it will sucess because of its quality. Every company that are trying something innovative are not providing high quality game and its failing. i tried Earthrise and mortal online the concept is great but its terrible quality, sorry fans! its feels very unfinished product.
Blizzard? Innovative? Why would they start doing that now?
Because they've always done it, and innovation is what made WOW great. We have taken so many of WOW's features for granted that we forget that it was WOW that made them a standard, however the minute someone's shopping in a new MMO and their existing gear doesn't pop up next to the item they are hovering over, you know darn well they are going to find that an incomplete vendor design.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Let blizz/Bio/Anet make something really innovative(hopefully Titan) and sure it will sucess because of its quality. Every company that are trying something innovative are not providing high quality game and its failing. i tried Earthrise and mortal online the concept is great but its terrible quality, sorry fans! its feels very unfinished product.
Blizzard? Innovative? Why would they start doing that now?
Because they've always done it, and innovation is what made WOW great. We have taken so many of WOW's features for granted that we forget that it was WOW that made them a standard, however the minute someone's shopping in a new MMO and their existing gear doesn't pop up next to the item they are hovering over, you know darn well they are going to find that an incomplete vendor design.
{Mod edit} Innovation made WoW great? What innovation? What greatness? WoW has absolutely no defining characteristics. It's just a dumbed down solo focused version of EverQuest. Innovation didn't make WoW big, a massive marketing budget did.
And if you're calling an item comparison popup window (which was done in other MMOs before WoW, as was everything in WoW) an INNOVATION, then I hate to see what you consider a mundane addition.
Originally posted by Garvon3 Originally posted by lizardbones You have 100 people complaining loudly about "innovation". arguing over the definition of "next-gen" and the definition of "mmorpg". You have thousands of people who don't visit the forums but are willing to pay money to play the games they like.
There's a descrepancy between the people loudly complaining and what the overall market wants. There is a market for the "innovative" games you described, it's just not as big as the market for games that offer progressive changes versus disruptive changes.
What progressive changes? The amount of progress that's been made in the last 6 years is... sadly, almost non existant. Compare that to the major leaps in progress from 1997-2003... and you can see why most people think the MMO market should just hurry up and die.
Technology doesn't progress in leaps and bounds at the consumer level. There are a lot of related reasons, but it comes down to the fact that it's not financially supportable. The occassional leap comes from waiting until the little bits of progress pay for themselves, or until you can capitalize on someone else's progress.
There has been progress, but mostly it has been in backend technology and in graphics. Those improvements are safe to make. Innovative game mechanics are a loaded gun. Housing in EQ1 or EQ2 was pretty cool, maybe not innovative, but cool. According to the devs, it helped topedo the game, but they couldn't take it out once it was in there. Developers don't want to repeat those mistakes so they make little innovations or little changes and slight improvements so they don't torpedo their own game. It's safe and it pays the bills.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
You have 100 people complaining loudly about "innovation". arguing over the definition of "next-gen" and the definition of "mmorpg". You have thousands of people who don't visit the forums but are willing to pay money to play the games they like.
There's a descrepancy between the people loudly complaining and what the overall market wants. There is a market for the "innovative" games you described, it's just not as big as the market for games that offer progressive changes versus disruptive changes.
What progressive changes? The amount of progress that's been made in the last 6 years is... sadly, almost non existant. Compare that to the major leaps in progress from 1997-2003... and you can see why most people think the MMO market should just hurry up and die.
Technology doesn't progress in leaps and bounds at the consumer level. There are a lot of related reasons, but it comes down to the fact that it's not financially supportable. The occassional leap comes from waiting until the little bits of progress pay for themselves, or until you can capitalize on someone else's progress.
There has been progress, but mostly it has been in backend technology and in graphics. Those improvements are safe to make. Innovative game mechanics are a loaded gun. Housing in EQ1 or EQ2 was pretty cool, maybe not innovative, but cool. According to the devs, it helped topedo the game, but they couldn't take it out once it was in there. Developers don't want to repeat those mistakes so they make little innovations or little changes and slight improvements so they don't torpedo their own game. It's safe and it pays the bills.
Well, having no innovations like AoC/Aion/LotRO/(insert failed WoW clone here) seems to work wonders.
I just miss the days when each MMO was unique and had new ideas.
Let blizz/Bio/Anet make something really innovative(hopefully Titan) and sure it will sucess because of its quality. Every company that are trying something innovative are not providing high quality game and its failing. i tried Earthrise and mortal online the concept is great but its terrible quality, sorry fans! its feels very unfinished product.
Blizzard? Innovative? Why would they start doing that now?
Because they've always done it, and innovation is what made WOW great. We have taken so many of WOW's features for granted that we forget that it was WOW that made them a standard, however the minute someone's shopping in a new MMO and their existing gear doesn't pop up next to the item they are hovering over, you know darn well they are going to find that an incomplete vendor design.
{Mod edit} Innovation made WoW great? What innovation? What greatness? WoW has absolutely no defining characteristics. It's just a dumbed down solo focused version of EverQuest. Innovation didn't make WoW big, a massive marketing budget did.
And if you're calling an item comparison popup window (which was done in other MMOs before WoW, as was everything in WoW) an INNOVATION, then I hate to see what you consider a mundane addition.
{Mod edit}
Dumbed down version of EQ? You mean fun version of EQ! EQ was ridiculous and was not meant for people with ordinary lives. It was simply too time consuming. Again stop with the everything was done in previous game stuff but conveniently not giving any specific examples. I want to hear about specific games which had the feature before WoW! {Mod edit} And don't give me examples of games which were released before WoW but implemented the said feature after WoW did. It's not only the launch date you should be looking at.
{Mod edit}
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Let blizz/Bio/Anet make something really innovative(hopefully Titan) and sure it will sucess because of its quality. Every company that are trying something innovative are not providing high quality game and its failing. i tried Earthrise and mortal online the concept is great but its terrible quality, sorry fans! its feels very unfinished product.
Blizzard? Innovative? Why would they start doing that now?
Because they've always done it, and innovation is what made WOW great. We have taken so many of WOW's features for granted that we forget that it was WOW that made them a standard, however the minute someone's shopping in a new MMO and their existing gear doesn't pop up next to the item they are hovering over, you know darn well they are going to find that an incomplete vendor design.
{Mod edit} Innovation made WoW great? What innovation? What greatness? WoW has absolutely no defining characteristics. It's just a dumbed down solo focused version of EverQuest. Innovation didn't make WoW big, a massive marketing budget did.
And if you're calling an item comparison popup window (which was done in other MMOs before WoW, as was everything in WoW) an INNOVATION, then I hate to see what you consider a mundane addition.
{Mod edit}
Dumbed down version of EQ? You mean fun version of EQ! EQ was ridiculous and was not meant for people with ordinary lives. {Mod edit}It was simply too time consuming Length of leveling up was not all that made EQ, the deep RPG mechanics and immersive SOCIAL world were the key parts . Again stop with the everything was done in previous game stuff but conveniently not giving any specific examples. I do when asked. Do you want me to go through each WoW feature and tell you where it came from? Much easier if you just give me a feature and I tell you where it came from. WoW has none of its own. I want to hear about specific games which had the feature before WoW! {Mod edit} And don't give me examples of games which were released before WoW but implemented the said feature after WoW did. It's not only the launch date you should be looking at.
{Mod edit}
I'm not a hater, I just dislike bad games, especially if the ruin my favorite video game genre, and don't like to see praise given where it isn't due :P
It takes more than a good idea or new approach. The reason so many inovotive games fail is because while the idea was good even great in some of the cases. The developer failed to develop it fully. This is for a number of reasons Vanguard for example ran out of funds. They could not afford to finish the game. Warhammer online ran out of time, they did not have the time to fully realise their vision. Both of these games were released in an incompete staus and ultimatly paid the price.
Innovation is a gamble your trying something new and because of that you do not have old facts old data to fall back on to help you realise it. You cannot look at other games that have used the idea and worked out what worked and what did not you have to take all these stages oboard yourself. The harshest fact is often after you failed another game can then take your idea and using your data recreate it better without the problems your own efforts highlighted (WOW is a main user of this approach).
That said innovation does work EQ1, DAOC, AO all these games added to the wealth of tools available to a mmorpg. EQ1 for example started it all most of the roots come from them. DAOC took PVP and gave it meaning your battlegrounds are their legacy. Anarchy Online, developed the instancing which love em or hate em are here to stay.
As consumers it is not that we hate innovation we love it but we want it to be well researched we want the idea to be well developed and we want the gameplay to be interesting and fun. The older MMORPGs had the benefit of being the trailblazers the consumer was more patient and understanding and there were not so many contendors fighting for players. The modern desgins have a larger target audience but a less forgiving one, the comperition is fierce and the long establised and well polished older games tend to highlight the areas they are lacking in. A modern game costs more to develop it takes more man hours and is under strickter expectations and under deeper scrutiny than ever before.
Something I've been wondering about for a while now, especially since I started reading the mmorpg.com forums where you hear the cry for innovation and the branding of 'WoW clone' of every themepark MMO so much more than on other sites.
I mean, everyone wants to be pleasantly surprised by something different or new, especially after playing years of MMO's. I have it myself, only not to the point that I started disliking themepark MMO's.
But I am puzzled by the discrepancy, the gap between reality and perceived preferences of the MMO playerbase:
if so many MMO gamers really want something new, innovative and/or different, then why is it that the really different MMO's failed?
And why is it that MMO gamers craving for something different aren't playing them now? Except for TCOS ofc that has been cancelled.
Look at Ryzom, The Chronicles of Spellborn or Vanguard. They all had features and mechanics that were different from the current themepark model. Then why did they fail?
Was it because of the time they were released in? People weren't as saturated yet with themepark mechanics like they are these days? So, would that mean that if these games would've been released now as brand new instead of years ago and with upgraded graphics, then MMO gamers would flock to these games for the different MMO gameplay they have to offer?
Or was it because of advertising and polish that both were lacking for these MMO's, that if those two aspects would've taken care of, then these MMO's would've been far more successful?
Or is it that most of the complaints about something new and different is just an illusion, something you'll only hear on gathering places for the jaded, burnt out MMO gamers as here, while the majority of the MMO gamers is happily playing MMO's with the same themepark game mechanics and features that they've been playing for years?
I haven't yet been able to figure out what of those reasons is the main one, but the gap between the numerous voiced wishes for some innovation or something different with the reality that different MMO's are hardly played is hard to ignore.
define fail.
Vanguard is still around, is that the qualifier for a fail?
When your project has perhaps 1/10th the advertising budget then its not so much that players dont want to play your innovative game, its that they dont know your game exists.
I used to never play a game unless gamespy gave it at least an 8.0 and during that time my gaming life was terrible. I had no idea how biased they were to the larger companies.
Money spent on PR has a lot to do with all of this
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
It seems I will have to flame you in this thread as well.
Dumbed down version of EQ? You mean fun version of EQ! EQ was ridiculous and was not meant for people with ordinary lives. And WoW is not meant for people with ordinary attention spans or mental capacity It was simply too time consuming Length of leveling up was not all that made EQ, the deep RPG mechanics and immersive SOCIAL world were the key parts . Again stop with the everything was done in previous game stuff but conveniently not giving any specific examples. I do when asked. Do you want me to go through each WoW feature and tell you where it came from? Much easier if you just give me a feature and I tell you where it came from. WoW has none of its own. I want to hear about specific games which had the feature before WoW! Or you just trolling again?' And don't give me examples of games which were released before WoW but implemented the said feature after WoW did. It's not only the launch date you should be looking at.
You might call me a Warcraft fanboy. But if I am a fanboy, you are a hater. Simple as that.
I'm not a hater, I just dislike bad games, especially if the ruin my favorite video game genre, and don't like to see praise given where it isn't due :P
So i guess you have a job with Nasa .. and you are responsible for the last missions the Discovery is presently doing?!
Elitist prick!
Report me, I don't care. For people like you with stupid posts like this, I gladly give up a few stars.
You made a stupid claim about the kind of people that played EQ, so I responded in kind. Have fun.
So i guess you have a job with Nasa .. and you are responsible for the last missions the Discovery is presently doing?!
Elitist prick!
Report me, I don't care. For people like you with stupid posts like this, I gladly give up a few stars.
Bah, if you're around here long enough to learn to avoid guys like Garvon. They're the old farts rocking on the porch, reminiscing about better days and yelling at the stupid kids to get off their lawns.
Anyways, though I'm sure the OP's question has been answered by now, I'm still going to respond. These "innovative" MMOs fail for a couple of reasons. One is they're actually not innovative enough. A popular tactic nowadays is to take mechanics found in the early sandboxes, tweak 'em a bit, then claim they're revolutionary. While this works sometimes, all you have to do is look at games like Earthrise to see what poor implementation does. It was made to bring back memories of UO and SWG, but unfortunately, it doesn't.
The main reason is lack of polish. Face it. 99% of the MMO community would rather play a relatively bug-free, smooth, pretty, and logical "WoW clone" than a buggy, choppy, ugly, and nonsensical innovative game. What companies like Trion understand is they can rip stuff off from their predecessors (as long as they add their own twists), and to be successsful, all they have to do is make their game polished. Not that that's easy, mind you, especially for the indie companies who often diverge from the WoW path and try to do something different. That's where people place the most blame: the budgets of these small development teams. "Oh, if only a company like Blizzard would put the manpower and resources into creating an innovative game! They'd change the genre forever, just like with WoW! Everyone would play it!"
Yeah. We'll see. For every person who is tired of WoW-type gameplay, there are 10 who aren't. When that'll change, who knows?
It seems I will have to flame you in this thread as well.
Dumbed down version of EQ? You mean fun version of EQ! EQ was ridiculous and was not meant for people with ordinary lives. And WoW is not meant for people with ordinary attention spans or mental capacity It was simply too time consuming Length of leveling up was not all that made EQ, the deep RPG mechanics and immersive SOCIAL world were the key parts . Again stop with the everything was done in previous game stuff but conveniently not giving any specific examples. I do when asked. Do you want me to go through each WoW feature and tell you where it came from? Much easier if you just give me a feature and I tell you where it came from. WoW has none of its own. I want to hear about specific games which had the feature before WoW! Or you just trolling again?' And don't give me examples of games which were released before WoW but implemented the said feature after WoW did. It's not only the launch date you should be looking at.
You might call me a Warcraft fanboy. But if I am a fanboy, you are a hater. Simple as that.
I'm not a hater, I just dislike bad games, especially if the ruin my favorite video game genre, and don't like to see praise given where it isn't due :P
So i guess you have a job with Nasa .. and you are responsible for the last missions the Discovery is presently doing?!
Elitist prick!
Report me, I don't care. For people like you with stupid posts like this, I gladly give up a few stars.
You made a stupid claim about the kind of people that played EQ, so I responded in kind. Have fun.
For a Nasa guy your reading skills are not that awesome ...
Because they've always done it, and innovation is what made WOW great. We have taken so many of WOW's features for granted that we forget that it was WOW that made them a standard, however the minute someone's shopping in a new MMO and their existing gear doesn't pop up next to the item they are hovering over, you know darn well they are going to find that an incomplete vendor design.
Oh WOW I hope you're trolling, I really do. Innovation made WoW great? What innovation? What greatness? WoW has absolutely no defining characteristics. It's just a dumbed down solo focused version of EverQuest. Innovation didn't make WoW big, a massive marketing budget did.
And if you're calling an item comparison popup window (which was done in other MMOs before WoW, as was everything in WoW) an INNOVATION, then I hate to see what you consider a mundane addition.
It seems I will have to flame you in this thread as well.
Dumbed down version of EQ? You mean fun version of EQ! EQ was ridiculous and was not meant for people with ordinary lives. It was simply too time consuming. Again stop with the everything was done in previous game stuff but conveniently not giving any specific examples. I want to hear about specific games which had the feature before WoW! Or you just trolling again?' And don't give me examples of games which were released before WoW but implemented the said feature after WoW did. It's not only the launch date you should be looking at.
You might call me a Warcraft fanboy. But if I am a fanboy, you are a hater. Simple as that.
I have to agree with Garvon3: EQ wasn't only for people who didn't have ordinary lives and it was certainly fun for a lot of people. It still is.
And WoW wasn't really innovative, it was more like Blizzard made improvements and polishing of already existing features in other MMO's. I think the only innovations Blizzard added was the Dungeon Finder and the phasing technology. And they didn't have to be innovative, I think that's the whole point: people played it because it was accessible and fun, it had lots of polish and content, they didn't play it for its innovation.
Will this still work in the current MMO climate, polish and content above innovation? I guess we'll find out this year, with all the MMO's that will come out, what MMO gamers prefer.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
if so many MMO gamers really want something new, innovative and/or different, then why is it that the really different MMO's failed?
The more you innovate the less quality you can maintain (unless you have unlimited funds/time). It's as if innovating puts the game in danger to venture in to the unknown where it may see it's doom.
Gamers want a quality game over innovation but they do want both and trying to make both happen is like said, either going to result it a drop in quality or be really too expensive to produce.
Comments
What progressive changes? The amount of progress that's been made in the last 6 years is... sadly, almost non existant. Compare that to the major leaps in progress from 1997-2003... and you can see why most people think the MMO market should just hurry up and die.
newsflash, warhammer is more than videogames.
And on that note, Warhammer>hippycraft.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling"
Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
I don't know what else has been said, but your answer is this: New is hard. Innovating means building something from scratch and that means it could be systematically broken. The reason there are so many copy cats (in MMO's as well as other genres) is that it's so much easier to polish someone else's gameplay. It's safe, and it's how we get our polished yet un-innovative titles like Call of Duty.
I know. I am talking only about computer games. I find the other 'activities' too geeky for my taste.
Hippycraft? I wouldn't even comment on this.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Because they vast majority of the mmo playing consumer base is made up of non-forum dwelling, non-hardcore gamers (at least historically speaking) who haven't followed the genres development since it's inception perhaps?
If 70%+ of those currently playing across all mmo's happened to be old Merid/UO/MUD vet's with a vested interest in all things gaming and a high forum troll factor then yes, it would point to the fact that these gamers who constantly talk about innovation, don't really want it.
But that's not the reality of the situation. Those who talk about innovation do want it, the vast majority of actual consumers though, don't.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
No one is asking for a game that is "different". They are always asking for a game that is fun, adn struggling to describe what would be fun.
Those games failed because they were not fun.
different =/= fun.
Features don't work in a vacuum. They work in combination with each other. you can't satisfy players that want a PvP game, by just flipping a switch and making the game PvP.
Unless all the other features work well with PvP, it won't be fun.
Problem is that 'innovation' to most MMO developers means to add an interesting catch to the game, not revamp teh ideal. Adding one special thing (eg. ability to fly) doesn't mean the game is innovative, in fact it means it just did something other games just couldnt be bothered with.
Innovation is to take the current ideas and move them in a way other games wouldn't dare. A perfect example is to have more than two player alliances... like 3 or even 4 way PvP, that is innovation, to do something that other games are too afraid of doing due forseen hurdles.
There you made my point for me. If they don't know what players want, they are not good developers.
Aion was more of the same with a gimmick and a different skin. It did reasonably well. We've yet to see how Rift works with its gimmick and different skin. One thing I'm confident about is that people will want something different eventually.
One thing is for sure; customer is not always right. More often than not he/she is wrong. Also, the loud pro-sandbox minority here at MMORPG.com shows that those who give feedback don't necessarily represent the whole player base. (Or maybe it is a vocal majority here but they still are a minority in the grand scheme of things.)
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
My short answer is: Money
My long Answer is: Because it takes tens of millions of dollars to make a AAA MMO these days, and investors don't want to risk that kind of cash on new. They only invest in tried methods. Business NEVER risks money on new, they always leech 'innovation' from small business, universities, and independent inventors.
Because most of the time they don't pull it till the end...eve made it and now it's one of the most favourite...
and cough ..cough.. GW2 cough...
I think I actually spent way more time reading and theorycrafting about MMOs than playing them
Because they've always done it, and innovation is what made WOW great. We have taken so many of WOW's features for granted that we forget that it was WOW that made them a standard, however the minute someone's shopping in a new MMO and their existing gear doesn't pop up next to the item they are hovering over, you know darn well they are going to find that an incomplete vendor design.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
{Mod edit} Innovation made WoW great? What innovation? What greatness? WoW has absolutely no defining characteristics. It's just a dumbed down solo focused version of EverQuest. Innovation didn't make WoW big, a massive marketing budget did.
And if you're calling an item comparison popup window (which was done in other MMOs before WoW, as was everything in WoW) an INNOVATION, then I hate to see what you consider a mundane addition.
Technology doesn't progress in leaps and bounds at the consumer level. There are a lot of related reasons, but it comes down to the fact that it's not financially supportable. The occassional leap comes from waiting until the little bits of progress pay for themselves, or until you can capitalize on someone else's progress.
There has been progress, but mostly it has been in backend technology and in graphics. Those improvements are safe to make. Innovative game mechanics are a loaded gun. Housing in EQ1 or EQ2 was pretty cool, maybe not innovative, but cool. According to the devs, it helped topedo the game, but they couldn't take it out once it was in there. Developers don't want to repeat those mistakes so they make little innovations or little changes and slight improvements so they don't torpedo their own game. It's safe and it pays the bills.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Well, having no innovations like AoC/Aion/LotRO/(insert failed WoW clone here) seems to work wonders.
I just miss the days when each MMO was unique and had new ideas.
{Mod edit}
Dumbed down version of EQ? You mean fun version of EQ! EQ was ridiculous and was not meant for people with ordinary lives. It was simply too time consuming. Again stop with the everything was done in previous game stuff but conveniently not giving any specific examples. I want to hear about specific games which had the feature before WoW! {Mod edit} And don't give me examples of games which were released before WoW but implemented the said feature after WoW did. It's not only the launch date you should be looking at.
{Mod edit}
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
I'm not a hater, I just dislike bad games, especially if the ruin my favorite video game genre, and don't like to see praise given where it isn't due :P
It takes more than a good idea or new approach. The reason so many inovotive games fail is because while the idea was good even great in some of the cases. The developer failed to develop it fully. This is for a number of reasons Vanguard for example ran out of funds. They could not afford to finish the game. Warhammer online ran out of time, they did not have the time to fully realise their vision. Both of these games were released in an incompete staus and ultimatly paid the price.
Innovation is a gamble your trying something new and because of that you do not have old facts old data to fall back on to help you realise it. You cannot look at other games that have used the idea and worked out what worked and what did not you have to take all these stages oboard yourself. The harshest fact is often after you failed another game can then take your idea and using your data recreate it better without the problems your own efforts highlighted (WOW is a main user of this approach).
That said innovation does work EQ1, DAOC, AO all these games added to the wealth of tools available to a mmorpg. EQ1 for example started it all most of the roots come from them. DAOC took PVP and gave it meaning your battlegrounds are their legacy. Anarchy Online, developed the instancing which love em or hate em are here to stay.
As consumers it is not that we hate innovation we love it but we want it to be well researched we want the idea to be well developed and we want the gameplay to be interesting and fun. The older MMORPGs had the benefit of being the trailblazers the consumer was more patient and understanding and there were not so many contendors fighting for players. The modern desgins have a larger target audience but a less forgiving one, the comperition is fierce and the long establised and well polished older games tend to highlight the areas they are lacking in. A modern game costs more to develop it takes more man hours and is under strickter expectations and under deeper scrutiny than ever before.
just my 2 cents
Gadareth
define fail.
Vanguard is still around, is that the qualifier for a fail?
When your project has perhaps 1/10th the advertising budget then its not so much that players dont want to play your innovative game, its that they dont know your game exists.
I used to never play a game unless gamespy gave it at least an 8.0 and during that time my gaming life was terrible. I had no idea how biased they were to the larger companies.
Money spent on PR has a lot to do with all of this
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
You made a stupid claim about the kind of people that played EQ, so I responded in kind. Have fun.
Bah, if you're around here long enough to learn to avoid guys like Garvon. They're the old farts rocking on the porch, reminiscing about better days and yelling at the stupid kids to get off their lawns.
Anyways, though I'm sure the OP's question has been answered by now, I'm still going to respond. These "innovative" MMOs fail for a couple of reasons. One is they're actually not innovative enough. A popular tactic nowadays is to take mechanics found in the early sandboxes, tweak 'em a bit, then claim they're revolutionary. While this works sometimes, all you have to do is look at games like Earthrise to see what poor implementation does. It was made to bring back memories of UO and SWG, but unfortunately, it doesn't.
The main reason is lack of polish. Face it. 99% of the MMO community would rather play a relatively bug-free, smooth, pretty, and logical "WoW clone" than a buggy, choppy, ugly, and nonsensical innovative game. What companies like Trion understand is they can rip stuff off from their predecessors (as long as they add their own twists), and to be successsful, all they have to do is make their game polished. Not that that's easy, mind you, especially for the indie companies who often diverge from the WoW path and try to do something different. That's where people place the most blame: the budgets of these small development teams. "Oh, if only a company like Blizzard would put the manpower and resources into creating an innovative game! They'd change the genre forever, just like with WoW! Everyone would play it!"
Yeah. We'll see. For every person who is tired of WoW-type gameplay, there are 10 who aren't. When that'll change, who knows?
For a Nasa guy your reading skills are not that awesome ...
I have to agree with Garvon3: EQ wasn't only for people who didn't have ordinary lives and it was certainly fun for a lot of people. It still is.
And WoW wasn't really innovative, it was more like Blizzard made improvements and polishing of already existing features in other MMO's. I think the only innovations Blizzard added was the Dungeon Finder and the phasing technology. And they didn't have to be innovative, I think that's the whole point: people played it because it was accessible and fun, it had lots of polish and content, they didn't play it for its innovation.
Will this still work in the current MMO climate, polish and content above innovation? I guess we'll find out this year, with all the MMO's that will come out, what MMO gamers prefer.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
if so many MMO gamers really want something new, innovative and/or different, then why is it that the really different MMO's failed?
The more you innovate the less quality you can maintain (unless you have unlimited funds/time). It's as if innovating puts the game in danger to venture in to the unknown where it may see it's doom.
Gamers want a quality game over innovation but they do want both and trying to make both happen is like said, either going to result it a drop in quality or be really too expensive to produce.